Functionalist Theory of Education

If you've come across functionalism before, you know the theory focuses on the positive functions social institutions like the family (or even crime) play in society. So, what do functionalists think about education?

In this explanation, we will study the functionalist theory of education in detail.

• First, we will look at the definition of functionalism and its theory of education, as well as some examples.
• We will then examine the key ideas of the functionalist theory of education.
• We will move on to study the most influential theorists in functionalism, evaluating their theories.
• Finally, we will go over the strengths and weaknesses of the functionalist theory of education overall.

The functionalist theory of education: definition

Before we see what functionalism thinks of education, let's remind ourselves what functionalism is as a theory.

Functionalists argue that education is an important social institution that helps meet the needs of society and maintain stability. We are all part of the same organism, and education performs the function of creating a sense of identity by teaching core values and allocating roles.

The functionalist theory of education: key ideas and examples

Now that we are familiar with the definition of functionalism and the functionalist theory of education, let's study some of its core ideas.

Education and value consensus

Functionalists believe that every prosperous and advanced society is based on a value consensus - a shared set of norms and values everyone agrees on and is expected to commit to and enforce. For functionalists, society is more important than the individual. Consensus values help establish a common identity and build unity, cooperation, and goals through moral education.

Functionalists examine social institutions in terms of the positive role they play in society as a whole. They believe education serves two main functions, which they call 'manifest' and 'latent'.

Manifest functions

Examples of the manifest functions of education are:

• Change and innovation: Schools are sources of change and innovation; they adapt to meet societal needs, provide knowledge, and act as keepers of knowledge.

• Socialisation: Education is the main agent of secondary socialisation. It teaches pupils how to behave, function, and navigate society. Pupils are taught age-appropriate topics and build their knowledge as they go through education. They learn and develop an understanding of their own identities and opinions and society's rules and norms, which are influenced by a value consensus.

• Social control: Education is an agent of social control in which socialisation occurs. Schools and other educational institutions are responsible for teaching pupils things that society values, such as obedience, perseverance, punctuality, and discipline, so they become compliant members of society.

• Role allocation: Schools and other educational institutions are responsible for preparing people and sorting them for their future roles in society. Education allocates people to appropriate jobs based on how well they do academically and their talents. They are responsible for identifying the most qualified people for the top positions in society. This is also referred to as 'social placement'.

• Transmission of culture: Education transmits the norms and values of the dominant culture to pupils to mould them and help them assimilate into society and accept their roles.

Latent functions

Some latent functions of education are as follows:

• Establishing social networks: Secondary schools and higher education institutions gather together under one roof individuals of a similar age, social background, and sometimes race and ethnicity, depending on where they're located. Pupils are taught to connect with each other and build social contacts. This helps them network for future roles. Forming peer groups also teaches them about friendships and relationships.

• Engaging in group work: When pupils collaborate on tasks and assignments, they learn skills that are valued by the job market, such as teamwork. When they are made to compete with each other, they learn another skill valued by the job market - competitiveness.

• Creating a generational gap: Pupils and students may be taught things that go against their families' beliefs, creating a generational gap. For instance, some families may be biased against certain social groups, e.g. specific ethnic groups or LGBT people, but pupils are taught about inclusivity and acceptance in some schools.

• Restricting activities: By law, children must be enrolled in education. They are required to stay in education until a specific age. Because of this, children cannot fully participate in the job market. In addition, they are required to pursue hobbies their parents and carers might want them to, which may at the same time distract them from engaging in crime and deviant behaviour. Paul Willis (1997) argues that this is a form of working-class rebellion or anti-school subculture.

Fig. 1 - Functionalists argue that education serves a number of positive functions in society.

Key functionalist theorists

Let us look at a few names you will encounter in this field.

Émile Durkheim

Social solidarity

Durkheim argued that society can only function and survive...

By this, he referred to cohesion, uniformity, and agreement between individuals in society to ensure order and stability. Individuals must feel themselves to be part of a single organism; without this, society would collapse.

Durkheim believed that pre-industrial societies had mechanical solidarity. Cohesion and integration came from people feeling and being connected through cultural ties, religion, work, educational achievements, and lifestyles. Industrial societies progress towards organic solidarity, which is cohesion based on people being dependent on each other and having similar values.

• Teaching children helps them see themselves as part of the bigger picture. They learn how to be part of society, cooperate to achieve common goals, and let go of selfish or individualistic desires.

• Education transmits shared moral and cultural values from one generation to the next, to help promote commitment between individuals.

• History instils a sense of shared heritage and pride.

• Education prepares people for the world of work.

Specialist skills

School prepares pupils for life in wider society. Durkheim believed society requires a level of role differentiation because modern societies have complex divisions of labour. Industrial societies are based mainly on the interdependence of specialised skills and need workers who are able to carry out their roles.

• Schools help pupils develop specialised skills and knowledge, so they can play their part in the division of labour.

• Education teaches people that production requires cooperation between different specialists; everyone, no matter their level, must fulfil their roles.

Evaluating Durkheim

• David Hargreaves (1982) argues that the education system encourages individualism. Instead of seeing copying as a form of collaboration, individuals are punished and encouraged to compete with one another.

• Postmodernists argue that contemporary society is more culturally diverse, with people of many faiths and beliefs living side-by-side. Schools do not produce a shared set of norms and values for society, nor should they, because this marginalises other cultures, beliefs, and points of view.

• Postmodernists also believe the Durkheimian theory is outdated. Durkheim wrote that when there was a 'Fordist' economy, specialist skills were needed to sustain economic growth. Today's society is a lot more advanced, and the economy needs workers with flexible skills.

• Marxists argue that the Durkheimian theory ignores the inequalities of power in society. They suggest schools teach pupils and students the values of the capitalist ruling class and do not serve the interests of the working class, or 'proletariat'.

• Like Marxists, feminists argue there is no value consensus. Schools today still teach pupils patriarchal values; disadvantaging women and girls in society.

Talcott Parsons

Talcott Parsons (1902-1979) was an American sociologist. Parsons built on Durkheim's ideas, arguing that schools were agents of secondary socialisation. He thought it was essential for children to learn societal norms and values, so they could function. Parson's theory considers education a 'focal socialising agency', which acts as a bridge between the family and wider society, detaching children from their primary caregivers and family and training them to accept and successfully fit into their social roles.

According to Parsons, schools uphold universalistic standards, meaning they are objective - they judge and hold all pupils to the same standards. The judgments of educational institutions and teachers about pupils' abilities and talents are always fair, as opposed to the views of their parents and carers, which are always subjective. Parson referred to this as particularistic standards, where children are judged based on the criteria of their particular families.

Children are not judged by standards that can be applied to everyone in society. These standards are only applied within the family, where children are judged based on subjective factors, in turn, based on what the family values. Here, status is ascribed.

Ascribed statuses are social and cultural positions that are inherited and fixed at birth and unlikely to change.

Universalistic standards

Universalistic standards mean that everyone is judged by the same standards, regardless of family ties, class, race, ethnicity, gender or sexuality. Here, status is achieved.

Achieved statuses are social and cultural positions that are earned based on skills, merit and talent, for instance:

Parsons argued that both the education system and society are based on 'meritocratic' principles. Meritocracy is a system which expresses the idea that people should be rewarded based on their efforts and abilities.

Evaluating Parsons

• Marxists believe meritocracy plays an integral part in developing false class consciousness. They refer to it as the myth of meritocracy because it persuades the proletariat to believe that the capitalist ruling class obtained their positions through hard work, and not because of their family ties, exploitation, and access to top educational institutions.

• Bowles and Gintis (1976) argued that capitalist societies are not meritocratic. Meritocracy is a myth designed to make working-class pupils and other marginalised groups blame themselves for systemic failures and discrimination.

• The criteria by which people are judged serve the dominant culture and class, and do not take into account human diversity.

• Educational attainment is not always an indicator of what job or role someone might take up in society. English businessman Richard Branson performed poorly at school but is now a millionaire.

Fig. 2 - Theorists such as Parsons believed that education is meritocratic.

Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore

Davis and Moore (1945) added to both Durkheim's and Parsons' work. They developed a functionalist theory of social stratification, which views social inequalities as necessary for functional modern societies because it motivates people to work harder.

Davis and Moore believe meritocracy works because of competition. The most talented and qualified pupils are selected for the best roles. This does not necessarily mean they achieved their position because of their status; it is because they were the most determined and qualified. For Davis and Moore:

• Social stratification functions as a way of allocating roles. What happens in schools reflects what happens in wider society.

• Individuals have to prove their worth and show what they can do because education sifts and sorts people according to their abilities.

• High rewards compensate people. The longer someone remains in education, the more likely they are to get a well-paid job.

• Inequality is a necessary evil. The tripartite system, a sorting system that allocated pupils into three different secondary schools (grammar schools, technical schools, and modern schools), was implemented by the Education Act (1944). The system was criticised for restricting the social mobility of working-class pupils. Functionalists would argue the system helps motivate working-class pupils placed in technical schools to work harder. Those who did not manage to climb the social ladder, or get better-paid jobs when they finished school, had not worked hard enough. It was as simple as that.

Evaluating Davis and Moore

• Differential achievement levels by class, race, ethnicity, and gender suggest that education is not meritocratic.

• Functionalists suggest that pupils passively accept their role; anti-school subcultures reject the values taught in schools.

• There is no strong correlation between academic achievement, financial gain, and social mobility. Social class, disability, race, ethnicity, and gender are major factors.

• The education system is not neutral and equal opportunity does not exist. Pupils are sifted and sorted based on characteristics such as income, ethnicity, and gender.

• The theory does not account for those with disabilities and special educational needs. For example, undiagnosed ADHD is usually labelled as bad behaviour, and pupils with ADHD do not get the support they need and are more likely to be expelled from school.

• The theory supports the reproduction of inequality and blames marginalised groups for their own subjugation.

The functionalist theory of education: strengths and weaknesses

We have evaluated the key theorists who espouse the functionalist perspective of education above in detail. Let's now look at the general strengths and weaknesses of the functionalist theory of education overall.

Strengths of the functionalist view on education

• It illustrates the significance of the educational system and the positive functions that schools often provide for their students.
• There does appear to be a connection between education and economic growth, indicating that a strong educational system is advantageous to both the economy and society at large.
• Low rates of expulsion and truancy imply that there is minimal overt opposition to education.
• Some argue that schools do make an effort to promote "solidarity"—for instance, through teaching "British values" and PSHE sessions.

• Contemporary education is more "work centred" and therefore more practical, with more vocational courses being offered.

• Compared to the 19th century, education nowadays is more meritocratic (fairer).

Criticisms of the functionalist view on education

• Marxists contend that the educational system is unequal since the wealthy benefit from private schools and the best teaching and resources.

• Teaching a certain set of values excludes other communities and lifestyles.

• The modern educational system places more emphasis on competitiveness and individualism, rather than on people's responsibilities to each other and society. In other words, it is less focused on solidarity.

• Functionalism downplays the negative aspects of school, such as bullying, and the minority of students for whom it is ineffective, like those who are permanently excluded.

• Postmodernists assert that "teaching to the test" undermines creativity and learning because it is focused entirely on scoring well.

• It is argued that functionalism ignores issues of misogyny, racism, and classism in education because it is an elitist perspective and the educational system largely serves the elite.

Fig. 3 - A criticism of meritocracy